Allowed

Ramithlal a P v. Sub Rto Thalassery

Kerala HC17 Feb 2022WP(C)/2267/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court held that no legal provision prevents consideration of an application for renewal of fitness certificate. The black listing of the petitioner's vehicle seized for an Abkari offence must be withdrawn to allow renewal, though this does not prejudice other proceedings.

What did the court decide?

The respondents directed to withdraw the black listing of the vehicle to allow renewal of fitness certificate.

Ramithlal a P Vs Sub Rto Thalassery — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 17^TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 28TH MAGHA,

¶5

1943

¶6

WP(C) NO. 2267 OF 2022

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

RAMITHLAL A P,AGED 27 YEARS,S/O RAJEEVAN, DRIVER, RESIDING AT EKARAMPARAMBATH, PUTHUR AMSOM, DESOM, P O PUTHOOR 670 692, PANOOR, THALASSERY, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV K.P.HAREENDRAN

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 SUB RTO THALASSERY, 2ND FLOOR, KINFRA PARK, 3RD MILE, ERANHOLI P O, THALASSERY,KANNUR, PIN - 670107

¶12

2 DEPUTY EXCISE COMMISSIONER, KANNUR OFFICE OF DEPUTY EXCISE COMMISSIONER, KANNUR, CIVIL STATION, F BLOCK, KANNUR, PIN - 670002

¶13

3 EXCISE COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,VIKAS BHAVAN P.O, NANDAVANAM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695033

¶14

SRI. BIMAL. K. NATH SR. G.P

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

W P(C) NO.2267 of 2022

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Vehicle belonging to the petitioner, bearing Registration No.KL 02 AK 9293, was seized alleging to be involved in an Abkari offence. The petitioner got interim release of the vehicle from the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court. Though the petitioner sought for renewal of fitness in respect of the vehicle, the same is declined since the vehicle is black listed in view of the crime referred to above. It is thereupon that the petitioner has approached this Court.

¶20

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner

¶21

and the learned senior Government Pleader.

¶22

There is no provision of law preventing or disabling consideration of the application for renewal of fitness. The authorities are bound to consider the request. The black listing of the vehicle shall be withdrawn for the above purpose.

¶23

W P(C) NO.2267 of 2022

¶24

¶25

However, this shall be without prejudice to the other proceedings in respect of the vehicle.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

Sathish Ninan, Judge

¶28

vdv

¶29

W P(C) NO.2267 of 2022

¶30

¶31

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2267/2022

¶32

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶33

Exhibit P1	REGISTR VEHICLE	ATION CERTIFICATE OF THE
Exhibit P2	COPY OF CERTIFI	THE INSURENCE CUM POLICY CATE
Exhibit P3	COPY OF	THE CONTRACT CARRIAGE PERMIT
Exhibit P 4	COPY OF CERTIFI	THE POLLUTION UNDER CONTROL CATE
Exhibit P 5	COPY OF	THE CMP NO 603/2021
Exhibit P6	COPY OF	THE ORDER DATED 28.06.2021
Exhibit P 7	COPY OF	THE CERTIFICATE OF THE FITNESS

Ramithlal a P v. Sub Rto Thalassery

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ramithlal a P v. Sub Rto Thalassery

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sajeev Vs Ancy

Saju Vs Subramanian

Rohini Vs Radhakrishnan Nair

M/S. Berger Paints India Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Samad Vs Kattakada Primary Cooperative Agricultural Rural Development Bank Limited

Mini Vs Managing Director